Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court upheld the levy of tax and penalty on the petitioner for fraudulent claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s 16 of the GST Act. The petitioner claimed ITC based on non-existent firms, later revealed by investigation. The court held that mere registration of firms does not entitle ITC if no actual supplies were made. Fraud vitiates proceedings, allowing authorities to reclaim wrongly availed benefits. The court found no illegality in the orders and dismissed the petition.
The High Court upheld the levy of tax and penalty on the petitioner for fraudulent claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s 16 of the GST Act. The petitioner claimed ITC based on non-existent firms, later revealed by investigation. The court held that mere registration of firms does not entitle ITC if no actual supplies were made. Fraud vitiates proceedings, allowing authorities to reclaim wrongly availed benefits. The court found no illegality in the orders and dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
